Re: Is 'long unsigned long' compliant to standard?

[Tom St Denis <tstdenis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Scott Moore wrote:
> long and unsigned are type-specifiers. They are accepted in a looping syntax
> such as declaration-specifiers (see the C grammar). Specifying long twice is
> simply redundant, and has no effect on the final type. 
>   

you mean "unsigned long" and "unsigned long long" are the same?

Or you mean that "long unsigned long " and "unsigned long" are the same?

Tom